I got a new rumor about the new Sony entry level FF E-mount camera. The anonymous source says:
“The super cheap e mount 35mm cam will be published next month. We got a delivery in our sony store. It will ship 21 april 15“
Over a month ago we got a rumor about that camera having a price of around 799 Euro. Sony patented that FE entry-level camera in 2013 already (SAR article here). Doesn’t mean the camera is coming for sure yet. But if Sony would really announce it this would become the world’s most compact FF camera yet. Still, Sony has no real compact FE lens to offer along this one a part of the [shoplink 33616 ebay]Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8 lens[/shoplink].
–
To not miss any of them quickly subscribe our social network:
RSS feed: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/feed/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sonyalpharumors
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SonyAlphaRumors
GooglePlus: https://plus.google.com/104216500156717934391/posts
And if you have some “rumor” to share just send me an anonymous messages here:
[contact-form-7 id=”14822″ title=”Share”]
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
219 Responses
Could be a good strategy to introduce people into the E Mount Ecosystem, and get them hooked.
agree… this is a worthy and not so expensive upgrade for all considering to buy a camera like an alpha 77II oder A6000. Should be available with the 28-75 kit lens for less then 1000€.
But that would also limit the price of an A7000 (if there is some…); why paying more (or at least approx. the same) for a small APS-C cam when going full frame is so “cheap”. And between that and the A6000 price isn’t much room left. And… consider the price of such a body in 6-12 months… maybe less then a RX100 Mk III…..
Maybe that’s why they introduced (and discounted) the A6000 at such a low price, to make room for a higher end APS-C and lower end FF camera..
Make this waterproof, then i want one. Thats because i am considering a Nikon aw1, to go with me when i want to be on the beach, and in the water
Sorry but a 1″ Sensor is just clearly inferior. think twice
Better than not having a camera with you because it was too big for that occasion.
A6000 + 16-50 is smaller than this.
Not very waterproof though.
yes, this bugs me off too
Most accounts seem to point to user error (not keeping the seals clean and lubricated)
this bugs me off. it’s a mirrorless camera, some nikon 1 don’t ever have a focal plane shutter. why can’t they make it totally waterproof?
Exactly.
He was thinking about a waterproof Nikon aw1.
Save yourself a headache. I had to use a 1 as an emergency backup after complete carnage, and its performance–especially in anything other than bright daylight–was terrible.
Aren’t there some decent underwater cam alternatives out there?
If it worked with the FDA-EV1S EVF, it would be the perfect upgrade from my NEX 5N, but pretty sure that won’t happen.
Should include an EVF-solution as used in RX100III. Add-on VF or just display would not be satisfying.
it would be better if it had small EVF rather than LCD to save space even further.
but a good evf (good = a7s like) is more expensive then a LCD. also a hotshoe will add some $$… so both is likely not to come (compare A5100/A6000) if this body is real
If it has a hotshoe, FDA-EV1MK will most likely work.
+10!
Sony forgot compactness, but maybe they will make up with this camera. The Zeiss 35mm F2.8 is compact enough, but it wouldn’t hurt if they would try to push the limits a bit with an even more compact 35mm lens, even if not as high in quality as the Zeiss.
We really don’t need another 35mm… What about a 50/2?
Why would they make a 50 f2 when there is a 55 1.8 ?
It’s too small for FF. FF needs bigger lenses to cover a larger sensor. I expect A7000 with weather seals and a little better 16-50. And IBIS, if it remains small
The FF 28/2 is smaller than comparable crop 24/1.8
Sony just will have to learn how to make small lenses.
They already do – the 35/2.8 is great. What we really need is a line of slower small primes.
What _you_ really need. I don’t need smaller lenses per se. I’m fine with the 55/1.8 or upcoming 28, even the macro or 35/1.4.
Who said I need them? I’m more than happy with my 35/2.8 and 55/1.8! But somebody buying a £600 full frame dslr isn’t exactly going to then drop another £1500 on lenses
Now it is clear. You said “what we really need”, that includes you, too, or not?
Voigtländer and Leica Lenses can be adopted easily. I’d love to have a smaller FF E-Mount camera.
exactly! The NEX5n ( and Ricoh GXR M ) have made me collect a number of formidable and very small rangefinder lenses. I like and want it small, a FF camera of the size of the NEX5n would be ideal for me, best if it took the FDA-EV1S EVF
It will be better than a7000 if it is well constructed and equipped with essential features.
Not necessarily. I just upgraded from the NEX-5R to the A7. With the exception of the SEL16F28, all of the lenses I was using in my regular kit were FF lenses. I never had a problem with the camera being too small or the lenses too big.
If there was a FE camera closer in size and shape to the 5R, I probably would have gone for it, especially if my add-on EVF worked on the compact FE.
Having a cheap FE body is one thing, but where are the cost-effective lenses to go with it? Personally I find this unlikely as the entire system cost is going to dwarf the price of the body.
I don’t care, I’d just buy it because i’m a fanboy 😀
and will mount old m39/m42 crap on it 😀
Exactly – they really need to release an “easy choice” equivalent if they go down this route.
It does seem a strange business model that Sony are adopting.
Normally, the bodies would be sold with a very slim (or non-existent) margin, in order to create a healthy market for lenses, flashes, etc., which give a much better return. Seeing as Sony seem so loathe to licence their standards to third parties it would seem that they want to follow the usual method.
However, to bring out a rash of bodies (even ones that receive great plaudits) without stocking the shelves full of lenses and equipment contradicts it completely! People most often moan about the lack of lenses, but just try getting a smaller flash, for instance! I gave up waiting for the HVL-F32M, so bought Nissin instead (glad I did!).
Either they need to get their line of accessories in full flow, or be more free with their licences. Once thrid parties come on board they could shift all the bodies they want to produce!
They released a ton of lenses in a year and a half, the problem they have is that the 3rd party manufacturers are not willing to get into FE. I wish we had more lenses like everybody else but I can’t blame sony for not releasing them all on their own, and so far only samyang and voigtlander are in the game.
Some would argue that the ‘ton of lenses’ aren’t enough!
As to Sony releasing all of them goes to the heart of the issue: do they want to corner their own market in accessories? I can see why they would, but unless they provide sufficient they will shoot themselves in the foot.
Unfortunately, Sony have a long record of doing just that. They seem to guard their proprietory standard too closely and so the market moves on and passes them by.
I don’t even know why they don’t sub-contract to expnd their lens range quicker, but there could be all sorts of reasons (contractual and financial) why this would not be possible.
What I do know is that they need to address the frantic requests for kit and support as quickly as humanly possible.
Except that model doesn’t make sense because the vast majority of people don’t buy lenses every year and upgrade them and replace them with new models of lenses… The multi-lens buying market segment is too small to rely on for profits
“The multi-lens buying market segment is too small to rely on for profits*
Tell that to Canon and Nikon, who seem to have done very nicely that way, and it seems to be the main criticism levelled as a reason why Sony can’t compete.
It’s system investment that keeps people coming back. Whilst nobody continually renews lenses, people do gradually accumulate them over times and that provides impetus for buying new bodies every now and then.
The problem is it takes time to establish a fully supported range and the customer base for it. I’m sure that Sony marketing and development teams are being kept awake at night on where to put the limited engineering resources.
What would greatly help is for third party product support. So far (manual lenses apart), that’s pretty limited.
I think Sony have always struggled letting third parties in.
I get the feeling that they have concerns any third parties will take away the lion’s share of the market, leaving them the crumbs. Unfortunately, with such an attitude what tends to happen is that the market Sony hope for never develops.
I said elsewhere, Sony have a track record of doing such things; the best example being betamax versus VHS, where Sony kept too tight on the licencing and most opted for the consequently cheaper VHS. If they’d had some courage betamax could have killed off VHS almost before it began, owing to smaller tapes and equal or better quality. C’est la vie…
It seems like they’re trying to establish the biggest customer base possible before CaNikon gets into the FF mirrorless market. We’ve heard a number of accounts of people switching.
The problem is, that it’s the investment in lenses that ‘locks’ a person in to a system. Definitely time for more lenses (including more pancakes for the smaller bodies).
maybe actually developing and producing new bodies costs much less than we expected and Sony is actually making profit with it.
That may well be true, but it’s a dangerous short term strategy that could leave them high and dry if Canon and Nikon get their mirrorless act together!
We’ll see what it’ll be good for. Could be nice to pair with smaller manual focus lenses. The A7 is a bit too clunky to adapt smaller lenses.
Why?
they should make something like ultraslim 30/4.5
Like pana 14mm f2,5 (f5) or pana 15mm f1,7 (f3,4) same size but more quality!
Exactly! With a mechanical focus ring, not fly-by-wire if it won’t make the lens much bigger.
hmm .. if this true then I think there will be no A99II on this announcement
I don’t think that they will announce 3 FF cameras on 1 day
Who said something else is coming…?
A99II rumors has been floating around for a while , so I expected it to be released this March/April but I think it will be delayed to the end of this year maybe
The only A99II rumors I’ve seen “floating around” are commenters on this site hoping…
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/?s=a99ii
I searched for rumors about A99II here and this is what I’ve found, it’s even was expected to be shown on CP+
Nothing solid about the A99II in that search.
“Released early 2015” – posted in August.
“60% (however that’s quantified) chance it will appear mid to late 2015” – posted in December.
You know some of these sources are just the admin guessing, don’t you?
I know that rumors ain’t solid , but I was hoping…
I also hope that you would talk about the admin with more respect instead of claiming that he is guessing.
He is working hard to bring news to us
Fair enough, though most of those seem to be hopes/predictions rather than rumors. Don’t get me wrong, though, I do hope one does get released.
Sony, please just take the take the body from a3000/a3500 and put in a ff sensor, will be perfect for longer lenses and old mflenses with adapters …. and keep it cheap
this would be the perfect camera. the A7 body is just too big for my uses
So, they’ve had a delivery in their Sony Store, but they couldn’t tell you what it’s called?
This has BS written all over it.
They wouldn’t be allowed to reveal that before the official announcement. In the marketing world, a product doesn’t exist until it’s been announced.
Err… what about all the cameras that have been named on rumour sites before their official announcement in the past? smh
A rumor is just that, a rumor. Don’t confuse it with an official announcement. Most rumors don’t originate from the manufacturers, but from fanboys, bloggers etc.
And if you had read my comment carefully, you would have noticed the important words “In the marketing world”. I’m not suggesting that a product doesn’t exist in the physical world before the official announcement date, but as far as the manufacturer concerns, it’s only at the time of the announcement that the product becomes known to the world at large.
I’m not confusing anything. Plenty of cameras have been leaked on rumour sites before their official announcement. Refute me.
You’re not wrong, but the information that is leaked on said rumour sites come from sources outside of the corporation. You may get some bad apples that work at the retailers that leak the info to these sites, but the fact of the matter is that sites like these go off of potential “BS” intel all the time. That’s what you call a rumour; info that is uncertain or unverified. If you want concrete info before the official announcements, I suggest you try to find your own sources.
This camera could work very well with Loxia lenses.
Why?
OK, the new 28 with converters is a cheap solution ala 16/2.8. There should be a cheap camera in the pipeline too.
Please do not cripple too much features!
If it’s cheap, then it’s crippled.
I know a few crippled cheap people. Coincidence? I think not.
It surely says ‘Please do not cripple [b]TOO MUCH[/b] features’
When you compare flagship to econo line, of course it’s going to seem crippled. While many features trickle down to lower end models, that takes time. You won’t see Sony cannibalize their sales of higher end models with lower end gear.
This is a Nex 5 picture WTF
Supposedly, the entry-level FF body will look like that. Makes sense to have an entry-level body that looks like a compact camera.
NEX-5 is FF? This is the image Sony used for their patent.
Maybe strategy is sell cheap FF body and hook people in to our over-priced FE lenses
while making it very difficult for third party manufacturers to make FE lenses. it’s called “vendor lock-in” and sony has a very large history of it. betamax, minidisc memorystick etc etc.
Fortunately there’s adapters but that increases cost and size and denies all the cost savings and portability advantages that the system could bring.
It’s a very stupid thing to do but company board likes to do it. they fail to see that if they had third party lenses being made the system would have a lot more and cheap lenses and they would absolutely kill the market. only retard fanboys would buy other camera brands.
But knowing how sony behaves that will never happen. We’ll always get overpriced lenses with sub pair performance.
hope its truth
sony already had seen the current hand of other manufacters (CP+)
they now can release the ones that will keep them at the front until next year
a cheap ff e camera, will surely get another nail in the cx/m43/apsc mirrorless couffin
agree that sony must release a cheap line of compact good lenses like they had in A mount (35mm1.8 a like) but that can wait another years (when price will be even lower at ff mirrorless and market had expanded to masses) for now expanding the “pro” line its good and the way to go
sony must relase before year end the a9 (dslr body, greatter battery or room for 2 current batteries, AF speed on par with a6000, 58mp sensor, dual or quad bionz, 2 or 4 times memory buffer, articulated touchscreen, built in flash with wireless ratio control, 5 axis is, wheather sealed) it will be expensive, but will be the flagship for the next 3-4 years, firmware updates yearly
as for the cheap line, a5, that would be like original a7 line + cut expensives (like plastic body, no evf, no 5 axis is) it will be smart to sell it bundle it with the only current prosumer lense available, the 24-240, sell the bundle around $1500, and will sell like hot cakes
I actually sense a bit of ‘push-back’ against the full frame movement (not due to the size of the body, but more due to the size of the lenses).
The smaller formats seem to be enjoying a bit of a surge on the ‘full frame isn’t necessary’ school. Maybe it’s just perception. Would love to see some data.
Everyone seems obsessed with f-ratio regardless of sensor size (so long, seemingly, as it’s 4/3’s or bigger that is).
If shooting landscapes at > f/5.6 (like most are) a 35mm sensor is wasted. Shooting anything under 50mm and expecting fore & back separation on anything less than 35mm is somewhat futile.
You put no thought at all into that post. Just a stream of unconscious ramblings and jibberish. Quite frankly it stinks.
Reminds me when Kramer lost his job on Seinfeld.
It’s as if you have no photography training at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU6m5UqLx9M
I have to agree with you on this one, Anton. That post was a mess!
Get off Asston’s nuts.
“Just a stream of unconscious ramblings and jibberish.” That would be an accurate description of every one of your repetitious posts Asston, and gibberish is spelled with a g.
Pot, kettle.
You should both STFU.
Gotakeapicturestophating
i think the 24-240mm and the 28mm lenses are for this kind of camera.
i would like to buy a nex 5 fullframe to replace my rx1.
bit i donnot think, that this camera will ever come. sadly
Replace your rx1?? BLASPHEMER!
Send me your rx1 and in return, I’ll ship you a few NEX batteries that you’ll need when the system comes out =P
Again sony in the persuit for making more cameras than lenses. while it’s always welcome lowering the price of FF cameras it’s not that good value since lenses perform subpair and are more expensive.
still great news. it’s almost as cheaper as second hand other brands FF dslrs.
If it has IBIS it will be a game changer <3 but for some reason I don't believe it.
unlikely to have IBIS, even the focal plane shutter is difficult to cram in here.
people said that FF mirrorless would never have IBIS because it was too small and yet here you have the A7 II. Since the mount the same and the space inside is also the same it’s very possible.
You have several examples of this:
-panasonic GM5
-Leica X1
-compare sony A7 II size with sony nex-7
This is not like the lens issue where you have the laws of physics preventing you from having very fast lenses in a small size.
>very fast lenses in a small size.
why do you mention laws of physics when you don’t know any?
the VM 40/1.4 is small enough and FF.
A7 is cheap enough.
Exactly what I was thinking.
A7 is too big because of bulky EVF.
“Bulky” What are you?……A vestigial dwarf? Since the EVF has to perform the role of interacting with the human eye it’s difficult to imagine how you could reduce it’s size by any noticeable degree. I feel you need the nice rubber eye piece for isolation and comfort so reducing the width is probably a non starter, and since the top of the EVF houses the hot shoe I can’t see much more than 5mm or so of reduction potential in that area. (but I’m not a camera designer so who knows).
Do you really think the device which practically ties you to the only position (at head height) is that useful for general photography? All other positions are cumbersome with eye level VFs and not steady at all, not to mention it is the lack of practice with different shooting technics that drives those photographing amateurs into thinking that pushing the camera into an eye is such a godsend.
No dwarf – LOL. I just don’t like the EVF in a dome on top. It makes the camera significant higher as it needs to be. And when looking through it my nose sticks to the display…
I just want the EVF placed in A6000 way. And if Sony has trouble pressing a FF-sensor into that small package, I would happy with a body beeing 1cm higher than A6000. This would be still less overall-height than A7 and you get a bigger handgrip for free.
And Sony: if you are reading this: please add touchscreen + popup-flash, too.
Just curious. No offense.
You want to shoot with LCD on a Full Frame camera?
The same way as shooting with iphone?
or
You want a tiny, low resolution EVF, so it can save some space?
Show me your photos, please. Most EVF zealots usually choose the only perspective that is easily available with eye level VF: from their head level. With non-fixed LCD you are limited much less.
Said no one ever.
(excessive sarcam) Shooting arms length is so stable. Why would anyone want a viewfinder?
Put the camera down, you idiot.
That is all what makes me not buy one, beside of the lossy raw compression crap. Nex-7 EVF system on the side of the camera and lossless raw and I step over.
@Shamael: (y)
don’t forget touchscreen and popup-flash and Sony has a new customer
but too big!
Definitely what she said.
I could be interested in an A6000-styled full frame A5 body. My requirements:
– EVF
– compact 85mm f/4 prime
– compact 150mm f/4 prime
I am just thinking of my current Micro Four Thirds setup when I need to go ultra compact. The existing FE 35/2.8 is a great upgrade from the Panasonic 20/1.7. However, I’m still lacking alternatives for my Olympus 45/1.8 and 75/1.8.
I donno if you’re going to be able to find compact FF glass, especially in those focal lengths. We can dream, though, can’t we?
It’s not cheap when you’re putting FE lens on it.
Unless Sony fixes the major issues on this camera as they’ve completely ignored on the A7r and all other mirrorless cameras it’s a doomed attempt.
No matter how sharp any lens is – the lens will give up 20% of its
resolution and 75% of color information on a Sony mirrorless. Until
Sony fixes the astigmatism and 11+7 bit color the Sony mirrorless
cameras are the new Fisher Price ‘my first cameras’ for children that
don’t know any better. https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
Take any Nikon D810 or D750 image and compare it side to side with a Sony A7r or other Sony mirrorless image on a high resolution wide gamut monitor and you will see glaring
differences in how the images can be processed and in their sharpness.
http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/01/19/review-sony-a7-mark-ii/
Comparing the Nikon images to equivalent megapixel Sony images shows virtually no difference. Which is quite remarkable considering the Sony is priced hundreds of dollars less and offers more features such as IBIS, focus peaking and zoom. NIkon’s are almost useless with manual focus lenses where the Sony cameras excell. The Sony cameras are a better value and offer equal or superior performance, all your envy won’t change that Anton. You’re a tired old troll.
I will haunt you all. I am the ghost of Sony past, present and future.
Wow, you sound like a real head case. I don’t believe in ghosts or trolls so don’t’ waste your breath. Take your lover Anton and go back to his blog where you can lavish praise on each other while making up “facts” that are not verifiable. What a pathetic bunch, get over your petty jealousy and move on.
You’re flat out wrong. You either don’t have a trained eye. Shoot only in daylight and don’t have high quality post equipment – large wide gamut screen etc.
Nikon costs more, more difficult to us, but it’s worth it. Sony images lose 20% in resolution and have only 25% of Nikon’s color information.
Those are very specific numbers, would you care to tell us what they are based on and where they came from? Or are you just pulling the numbers out of thin air to make your point?
He’s the proverbial jilted lover turned stalker.
https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/ Sometimes 50-100%
Good point (not). When you cannot get anything under f/5.6 sharp its better to have that 14bit goodness resolving it isn’t it. Blithering idiot!
Rubbish!
See today’s post – https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
Why do we care, we can actually make decent exposures, well within the 3.5 stops of tolerance of our crappy Sony compression that is. But if your work is regularly off by an addiction 1.5 stops, yes, you will need the D810. Morons win with the Nikon D810 for sure!
Personally I switched from Canon to Sony and have never even held a FF Nikon DSLR so I can’t directly comment on that. The thing is that, usually people say Canon and Nikon are near as damn it like for like systems and choosing one or the other is akin to tossing a coin. So from my POV because, for my needs the A7 I bought ‘appears’ to shit all over a 5Diii or 1Diiii (image quality wise), I have difficulty accepting the concept that Nikon’s top cameras are as much again superior to the Sonys (same sensor) which by logic would mean they are way better than their supposed equal in Canon.
I do use an acer wide gamut monitor and can’t say I’ve personally noticed any of the issues mentioned in the article such as off colours or banding under heavy processing maybe I’ll notice it now it has been mentioned (Ill keep an eye out). I also can’t say that I’ve heard any other pro reviewers mention these issues in any of the multitude of reviews I’ve read before or after getting My A7 (selective deafness?). So it’s difficult to know whether their opinions are driven by a hidden agenda or not.
show us your real photos ruined by 11+7 compression
He doesn’t have any, but he had the nerve to accuse somebody else of not being a real photographer.
All you have to do is read.
http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/01/19/review-sony-a7-mark-ii/
Yeah, he’s full of it! Since when does the A7x shoot XAVC, I’d love the answer to that. Try XAVC-S, more unqualified reviewers. SIGH.
>Sony has always been quite a video-centric company. Though I lack the expertise to comment meaningfully on the camera’s video capability, I do see that the ability to produce smooth, usable video handheld with some movements like we’ve been doing with the E-M1 in the past is now pretty much possible with the rendering of full frame. My camera came with 1.10 already installed, so I can’t say how much of an improvement that update made; but in practice, it’s really not so different to the Olympus. There is still some rolling shutter, however, so movements must be undertaken with care. What I do like is that my Otii now render with the focal length they’re supposed to have, and look fantastic. There is one catch, though: you need to be able to deal with the XAVC format in order to get the most out of the camera; unfortunately in in Mac-land, there seems to be very little support for this. You don’t even get a basic converter utility with the camera, we’ve got to resort to an (additional cost) third party solution. Sigh<
And then you completely skipped this point Mr O’Reilly. If he, your hero-pro cannot get sharp focus off his D810 with OTUS glass, you sir are in dire straights, being the h’amateur you indeed are!
>I think the days of the optical finder are numbered as resolution increases. This is for a couple of reasons: firstly, critical focusing (plus alignment and the other related issues) gets harder and harder; secondly, it’s easier to design some optics with a shorter flange distance and thus there’s not much space for a mirror; thirdly, I’d much rather have good manual focus ability for critical applications, and that’s much easier with finder magnification than the LCD for stability; finally, the ability to see the effect of sensor-stabilization in the finder for composition and precision of focusing should not be underestimated. In practical deployment, I’ve got to attach a Zacuto magnifying hood to my D810 for use with the Otuses and APO-Lanthars; this significantly increases size and bulk. Whilst the A7II really needs the battery grip to balance off an Otus, it’s still quite a bit smaller and lighter thanks to the EVF. And we haven’t even talked about stability yet. Handheld, I’m potentially either giving away quite a bit of dynamic range by upping my ISO, or detail lost in camera shake. There is no free lunch<
I handhold the 810 with Otus and get critical focus. The trick is to go to f4-5.6 and let DOF take care of your error. I am equally comfortable with the Nikon through the OVF as Sony’s EVF after about 2 months and 2400 photos.
The Sony gives up 20% even with an Otus. Either way higher hit rates and better images come from the Nikon.
We haven’t even yet discussed post – https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
You’d be happy using an Otus and just accepting that you’ll always have to stop down to f4-5.6 in order to get your shots?? Are you insane? What a waste those lenses are in your hands! And yes, I have used both the 55 and 85, and focusing with them on the a7r is tricky but quite possible wide open with some skill and care. With an OVF – it’s pot luck at that aperture, I find it too frustrating by comparison.
>I handhold the 810 with Otus and get critical focus. The trick is to go to f4-5.6 and let DOF take care of your error<
If you are serious here (I sincerely hope you are taking the piss) you are an absolute moron!
Yes, read what Ming said about the abysmal Nikon manual focussing, but the files will display every focus error in 14bit Nikon goodness. Idiots times two.
Even better – here are Ming’s. A professional with no agenda
Sony
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7501/15710803253_9f524a93c3_o.jpg
Nikon
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7524/16304769756_d447203d98_o.jpg
BOTH images show posterization.
Maybe there’s a problem at his end. Display drivers, colour management profiles etc…
I don’t see any posterization in the D810 image. However, it’s too heavily compressed: the JPEG compression creates rectangular blocks in the sky.
Two completely different images taken at different times; it only proves how weak your argument is. Nothing else.
That “magenta banding” is simply… clouds over the city.
You can see even cloud edge highlighted by some batman style reflector over the building with red light.
Great “test” ;]
I couldn’t and cannot reproduce that posterization on either Nex 5n or A6000 on a typical night scene ( not certainly in raw and not even in jpg shots from the camera). It Maybe we should open a public online entry from all owners of Sony mirrorless camera taking shots of a night time city landscape and see how many get posterization in their images.
You got to be a special kinda special to shoot as bad as Anton Berlin, he needs all the help he can get (he really needs a 32bit file).
Here some some snapshots from myself taken with 5n: https://www.flickr.com/photos/raminolta/sets/72157650651214808/
Real photos deekwad https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
Spamming this site with the same old crap over and over again will change nothing. If you have Sony kit and don’t like it, sell it and move on. End of.
Could be Sony ILCE-QX1 type camera…
I’m in the market for the A7RII, I need high MP. But for a compact camera like this, If you don’t get high megapixels, and you don’t need crazy ISO shooting. Is there really a benefit to FF over a crop sensors?
Even my GH-2 prints some great 16x20s. And compared to the size and lens selection in the M43 world, these monster size FE lenses seem to be a real disadvantage.
A larger sensor with gather more light. Your focal lengths will also be true to the lens spec, and the quality of the lenses you have access to will also go up (some would say FF lenses on APS-C cams are a waste… not sure where I stand on the matter).
The biggest drawback to FF is the one you mentioned. If you’re looking for compact, FF glass doesn’t cater to small as it’s more about quality. That is, of course, unless you want to go MF Leica. They have FF coverage with really compact glass. You’ll just pay through the nose for them.
While I personally don’t mind carting my A7ii and 16-35 around, if you’re looking for ultra compact, you may want to stick to APS-C
Assuming this is true, any idea of how many mp?
Probably 24mp. It must be Sony’s cheapest sensor by now.
The highest regarded people in the industry all recognize Sony’s shortcomings.
In a perfect world, I’d like Sony to not have these issues. But the reality is they are there.
Read my blog – https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
There is a possibility that you have strayed into ‘no true Scotsman’ territory with your first point, but anyway.
Reading about it is all very well and good but I really need to notice it in my own pics before it becomes a real problem (which I may well do, and it may well be).
Wow, your blog has no examples by you, shocking!
>The highest regarded people in the industry<
LOL
Real pics
https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
Not your though.
Maybe it will have a pop-up viewfinder like the A6000. I wouldn’t buy a camera without a viewfinder.
Oops, my bad. I was thinking the RX100 III pop-up viewfinder. The A6000 still has a EVF though.
There will be no space for Pop-up EVF. Have you seen the size of the sensor? IF you do the math theres no way it will fit in the body.
I would be happy just to have the same style as the a5100 in full frame format
Sensor is really small compared to full frame shutter. Even “a5100 in full frame format” is barely possible.
This will be the fullframe version of the a5100. I can’t wait for it to be announced since as an e-mount video shooter I don’t use the EVF much often .
I’m hoping for XAVC-S video codec and the same Hybrid AF feature as the A7II. If this camera has that feature then it’s sold before it’s even out 🙂
despratrely need a FE pancake zoom.
with f1.2 constant app, 14-200 range, and internal focus! 2″ length is a must, but compromise to 3″ is ok… not ideal, though.
Why have difficulties accepting something you heard about something you haven’t even used? Rent/borrow one and find out…
Because it doesn’t make sense to me. So I asked the question.
Would you rent a Ferrari because someone told you they could fly to the moon? Or would you simply just ask someone with said Ferrari if it is true first?
That will kill all APS-C a5XXX, a6XXX and a7XXX. It is not a need! Alpha 5XXX, 6XXX and the new a7XXX are awesome MILC!
A7II is too slow to focus. A6000 still reign supreme for video use.
The only reason to go full frame is for DOF. Low light is not a problem with A6000
No one needs DOF that can shoot only tip of a nose 🙂
Got MILC?
I don’t think a retail store can get product that early, if this is the case, we should have already seen major leaks, since there is none, I call this fake
that would be great.
But funny things, that from the quality and features point of view it is not going to deliver more.
Resolution-wise it will be worse than A6000-A5100. As the 24Mp FF matrix has to have the anti-moire filter, and all the initial advantage of the FF vs APS-C in resolution will be eaten up by the filter completely. A6000-A5100 shows the same 3400 lines of resolution, as the A7, A7-II, Nikon D600, Nikon D650
Video quality of the 24Mp FF matrix at A7, A7S is really poor. while the A6000-A5100 video – is of a top quality class.
Auto-focus of A7, A7s is poor compare to the one of A6000-A5100. Because of the less quaulity on-matris autofocus sensors at 24Mp FF matrix.
also the FF fix lenses have no stabilization, unlike the APS-C one’s which almost all have.
So the FF variant in certain cases will provide poorer capabilities for shooting handheld.
Please do catch up with today. Sony are producing in-camera stabilisation now. OH SIGH….
that is at A7-II only at price of the higher body sickness.
Sony is not putting the in-camera stabilization in the NEX bodies.
It is also obvious, that simply there are not space for it there, there are no enough cooling capacity either there, so matrix which is not having the heat dissipation plate will be overheated at video recording.
also I would mention competition (NX500), which going to deliver 4k video in similar price range body, 28Mp high quality APS-C sensor.
So, overall Sony missed that train.
correction not A7S but A7-II was thought of. obviously A7S has very good video
I’m still buying Sony cameras because of this one thing called ” Zeiss”.
Zeiss lens on Nikon vs the same lens on Sony A7r –
https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/zeiss-apo-sonnar-135mm-imatest-on-sony-a7r-and-nikon-d810/
Still buying Sony ?
Why not? Nothing in that test says the sony is bad.
Yep, we can getumsharpum @ f/1.8 too, you friggin’ stoner.
poor a7s video ? you clearly lack brain 😀 that camera is being called poor man’s alexa !
I bought into betamax and minidisc… you’d think I would have learned with FE camers… nope!
sounds like people waiting for a7rii n a99ii will be disappointed again
Even if this is real, why? 4d AF on FF bodies is needed much more than a cheaper A7. Besides A7 bodies can easily be found well under $1000. AF on the a6000 puts the A7/r/s to shame, it needs to make it to the FF cameras. Also, just from a handling standpoint, the A6000 body would make more sense with the bigger FE lenses, but really none of the APS bodies would work well with a FF sensor. The A7 is really pushing it size wise. Just my opinion as a A7, A7s and A6000 user.
Well said. The e mount had been desiged for APS-C originally I have no idea why sony decided to make FF cameras with the same mount?
Sony has issues with its $2000 cameras. Hard to imagine how much will be lacking in the ‘cheapo’ version. https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
Nothing in those “tests” make the sony look “lacking”.
I’ve seen better testing methodology at the “free clinic.” LOL
Canon’s $2000 APS-C camera has issues with their image quality…
What like the Nikon D750 flare-cam.
Camera from the picture above is impossible to build without electronic global shutter.
really? what camera have you ever made exactly?
Check how big is full frame focal plane shutter, eg from A7 😀
Let’s hope A7000 is NOT a full frame camera. Fingers crossed.
If they put out A7000 as a cheap FF it will be a great dissappointment.
WE WANT CROP SENSOR, FF DOF is too thin!
All you need to do is adjust your aperture…
And lose the light. With less light, I have to use higher ISO. By using higher ISO full frame loses all the advantage of dynamic range and noise levels over the APS-C.
I suggest you learn flash then!
If you shoot street, you’ll auto-iso anyway
if you shoot landscape you’re using small aperture anyway
if you’re shooting portraits you should learn flash
if you’re shooting wildlife, you wouldn’t switch to the FF anyway unless you can afford uber lenses which isn’t the case if you are considering cheap FF.
If the A7000 is FF (and lets hope so) then you have plenty of other existing options.
No we don’t have existing options. We have a crappy EVF and controls on a6000 and that’s it.
I do not want to use flash and I never use auto ISO on the street. I have it all on M.
You’re not making any sense.
By using APS-C, you are ALREADY LOSING LIGHT.
You get the same depth of field and light equivalence on f2.8 on APS-C and f4.2 on FF.
ISO performance is twice as better on FF.
You get image in the end with FF.
You are not losing light. The amount of light per sq/inch is the same.
If you get focal booster on aps-c you get more light per sq/inch and hence convert a 1.4 lens into 1.2 one.
By using f4.2 you are letting less light per sq/inch to the sensor.
ISO performance is not twice as better on FF. Check DPreviews and DXOmarks. ISO 800 on APS-C is usually equal in dynamic range and noise to ISO 400 on FF.
By stopping down FF to get a useful DOF you are getting the same amount of noise and dynamic range you would get from an APS-C by using ISO 800 on FF where you would use ISO 400 on APS-C.
There is no advantage today of FF over APS-C, it’s the other way around.
The focal booster IS the equalizer and proof against what you are saying. FF is cheaper to have low DOF and can have lowest possible DOF and can eek out the most light captured per image (total sensor) and APS can be a smaller system (bodies/lenses).
If all things were equal, you’d be a fool to choose anything over FF. But FF does increase price and size of lenses so all things aren’t equal.
FWIW, I shoot a Sony A55 and Olympus EM5.
You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about.
Go get a Canon T3i. That’s a perfect camera for you.
Really? Check the DXO and DPReview charts.
A6000 and A7
ISO 400 of A6000 has the same IQ quality as ISO 800 of A7
ISO 400 of A6000 has BETTER dynamic range than ISO 800 of A7
To be able to take a photo of a human face and have in focus whole face and not just the tip of a nose would use (let’s imagine the light is not perfect):
A6000: 35mm, f3.5, 1/125, ISO 400
A7: 50mm, f5.6, 1/125, ISO 800
By having to use ISO 800 on A7 for the same photo A6000 is taking with ISO 400 you are losing all advantage of FF SNR and DR.
Read up people, stop talking nonsense.
In this situation, you can use ISO200 on ff camera to be equal. Therefore less noise on your image taken from ff camera. Go watch youtube videos by Tony Northrup.
You cannot. Difference between f3.5 and f5.6 is too big to be covered with just ISO 200.
What’s more, ISO 100 and ISO 200 are almost the same between A6000 and A7.
You don’t understand.
f3.5 on APS-C is same as f5.25 on ff.
f5.25 and f5.6 is a big difference???
You have to apply the crop factor the focal length as well as the F-stop.
You are wrong about the ISO.
APS-C iso must be doubled from the full frame to calculate correctly.
2.25 (1.5^2) to be exact.
You can get the same amount of light at ISO 100 on full frame and ISO 225 on APS-C.
f3.5 on APS-C is NOT same as F5.25 on FF – from the light gathering point of view.
F3.5 on APS-C is exactly the same as F3.5 on FF from LIGHT GATHERING POINT.
You don’t understand the basics. :-))
Really man, read up, you are off charts wrong :-))
You don’t even know what ISO does :-))
I think it may have the c mode as a7 did
So you get what, a 10Mp camera?
Irresistible if true and with an EVF.
I think the a7 series is cheap enough, and this even cheaper, oh God! Fuji, Olym gonna cry.
A full frame A5 with a NEX5 form factor and without (!) EVF is too good to be true. Add “super cheap” to this and we have a fairy tale that will never come true. False rumor if you ask me. 😉
To make this wet dream even better, I would add A7s like ISO performance to the package…
A full frame mirrorless in rangefinder form factor (like A6000 with no hump) with touchscreen, XVAC codec, silent shutter and metal mount in sub $1000 price range: call me to order one right away. It would be nice if it also comes in both black and silver finishes. Metal body and weather sealing are nice if they don’t significantly add to the price. 🙂
I am wondering why Sony don’t do the following innovations? The purpose is obviously to keep the compact size of the system:
i) an evf that sits inside the body like a built-in flash which pops up and opens with the press of a button.
ii) collapsible prime lenses that shrink when the camera is off and expand when the camera is turned on. If you look at the lateral diagram of many prime lenses (including the high quality ones) there are spatial gaps between the lens elements).
I just learned RX100 III already has a pop-up evf.
No it is not. Light per sq/inch is the same. Booster actually generates MORE LIGHT PER SQ/INCH.
There is no real advantage with FF.
Light per sq. inch is irrelevant. Total light gathered is what matters. Come on, be smarter.
If you were right, cell phone camera sensors would be all we needed.
Dude you are embarrassing yourself.
APS-C sensor has a smaller area that shows smaller part of the full frame sensor (crop factor).
The amount of light that is hitting APS-C sized area of FF camera is the same as the one that is hitting the APS-C sensor.
Both are gathering the same light per sq/inch which is all that matters. F2.8 lens on APS-C is giving you the same “brightness” of the image as it does on the FF.
Dude, those are basics. Really. Just stop.
“The amount of light that is hitting __APS-C sized area of FF camera__ [emphasis added] is the same as the one that is hitting the APS-C sensor.” This is absolutely true.
“F2.8 lens on APS-C is giving you the same “brightness” of the image as it does on the FF.”
The amount of light going through the F2.8 lens is indeed constant regardless of sensor. If the image circle of the lens is exactly covered by each sensor, then the amount of light hitting each sensor is indeed exactly the same.
So the way your perspective can be accurate is if you are thinking about using an FF sensor in APS crop mode or with such a limited F2.8 lenses.
However, if the lens is made for FF and being used on both sensors, then more total light will hit the FF sensor than the APS sensor because some of the light is being caught by the FF sensor and missed by the APS sensor.
That’s why the best FF sensors have a 1, maybe 2 stop advantage over the best APS sensors. In order to maintain the depth of field, reducing the aperture to match the APS DOF will give back most of that advantage.
But to say that APS is better than FF is still wrong for everything but size/weight of the system and possibly for telephoto resolution purposes.
I hope this helps. https://photographylife.com/sensor-crop-factors-and-equivalence http://digital-photography-school.com/full-frame-still-best/ http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-full-frame-debate.html
Dude, the light the FF captures is on the PART OF THE PICTURE that APS-C does not capture!
The overall exposure to light of the picture is 100% the same for both FF and APS-C.
If you put the same F2.8 lens on both APS-C and FF, both APS-C and FF will use THE SAME ISO and Shutter Speed to get the SAME exposure of the picture!
FF has a wider FOV compared to APS-C, for the SAME SETTINGS.
That is all.
Ah yes, and FF has much thinner DOF which is pain in the ass.
FF has advantage in DYNAMIC range because its pixels are MUCH BIGGER (even that is not true any more, just compare Cannon with A6000).
That is why APS-C has the MAGNIFICATED CROP FACTOR, it’s pixel density is much higher than that of FF and that is why wild life photographers prefer APS-C – it literally converts 135mm lens into let’s say 1.5x135mm, something that is NOT POSSIBLE when using “crop mode” on a FF.
People, how in a world you could miss all that basic stuff?!
When shooting “people” photos, thin DOF makes FF lose all its advantage in DR and SNR.
Once you start shooting things that are further away, FF gets back its advantage of DR and SNR.